MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509405854 · doi:10.1029/2008tc002326

Factors controlling the evolution of the Perdido Fold Belt, northwestern Gulf of Mexico, determined from numerical models

2009· article· en· W1509405854 on OpenAlexafffund
Sofie Gradmann, Christopher Beaumont, Markus Albertz

Bibliographic record

VenueTectonics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersKillam TrustsDalhousie UniversityDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftGovernment of Canada
KeywordsDiapirGeologyFold (higher-order function)Salt tectonicsStructural basinOverburdenContext (archaeology)GeomorphologyStratumPetrologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Perdido Fold Belt (PFB) is a prominent salt‐cored deep water structure in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. It is characterized by symmetric, kink‐banded folds of a ∼4.5 km thick prekinematic layer and its vicinity to the extensive Sigsbee Salt Canopy. We use 2‐D finite element numerical models to study the evolution of the PFB as a gravity‐driven fold belt both in a local context and in the context of the larger‐scale passive margin, influenced by adjacent allochthonous salt structures. We show that parameters such as overburden strength, salt geometry, or salt viscosity determine timing, extent, and location of the modeled fold belt. Simplified models of the Gulf of Mexico show that toe‐of‐slope folding is a viable mechanism to develop diapirs in the deep salt basin and to delay folding of the distal overburden. In this scenario, the PFB likely represents the terminal folding of a much larger, diachronously formed fold belt system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations87
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTectonicsSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207